Band 7.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 7.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-09-23

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Access to clean water is a basic human right. Therefore every home should have a water supply that is provided free of charge.

Do you agree or disagree?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Student answer (Band 7.5)

Access to clean water is undoubtedly a fundamental human necessity, and some argue that every household should receive an unlimited water supply free of charge. I largely disagree with this view because, although everyone should have access to safe drinking water, providing all water entirely free of charge could encourage waste and place an unsustainable financial burden on governments.

The strongest argument for free water is that no individual should be deprived of this essential resource because of poverty. Low-income families, in particular, may struggle to pay utility bills, despite needing water for drinking, cooking and sanitation. Governments therefore have a responsibility to ensure that disadvantaged households can obtain a sufficient quantity of clean water. For example, in Nepal, many rural and low-income communities have historically faced difficulties accessing reliable drinking water, so publicly funded water-supply projects can significantly improve living standards and public health.

However, making the entire household water supply free for everyone is not necessarily the most effective solution. Water treatment, infrastructure, maintenance and distribution require substantial and continuous investment. If consumers pay nothing regardless of how much they use, some may have little incentive to conserve water, resulting in unnecessary consumption and higher pressure on already limited resources. A better approach would be to provide every household with a basic quantity of safe water free of charge while charging progressively higher rates for excessive consumption. This would protect vulnerable citizens without encouraging waste.

Furthermore, revenue from water charges can be reinvested in maintaining pipelines, improving treatment facilities and extending supplies to underserved areas. In Nepal, where some communities still face seasonal shortages, such investment could be particularly important for developing a more reliable and sustainable water network.

In conclusion, clean water should be universally accessible, but I do not believe that all household water should be completely free. A system that guarantees a free basic allowance while charging for excessive use would better balance social equality, environmental responsibility and the long-term sustainability of water services.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.5

The candidate has fully addressed all parts of the prompt by presenting a clear position throughout the essay. The stance—disagreeing with the idea of a completely free water supply for all homes while acknowledging the need for basic access and government support—is well developed and sustained. Ideas are logically extended and supported with relevant explanations and a concrete example regarding Nepal. The response meets all the requirements of an academic task 2 essay, demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of the prompt and maintaining a balanced, thoughtful perspective from the introductory paragraph through to the conclusion. The descriptors for Band 8 are strongly met here due to the thorough and well-supported development of ideas.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.5

Ideas are logically sequenced and progress naturally from introducing the topic and stating the position, to discussing arguments for free water, introducing the counter-argument about sustainability, proposing a nuanced solution, and finally concluding. Cohesive devices are managed skilfully without being overly mechanical, as seen in transitions like 'The strongest argument for free water is...', 'However, making the entire household...', and 'Furthermore, revenue from water charges...'. Paragraphing is used sufficiently and appropriately, with each paragraph focusing on a distinct central theme. Referencing and substitution are clear throughout, contributing to an essay that is easy to follow and cohesive at a high level.

Lexical Resource: Band 7.5

The candidate demonstrates a wide, fluent, and flexible vocabulary range suited to an academic discussion. Less common lexical items are used skilfully and naturally, such as 'fundamental human necessity', 'unsustainable financial burden', 'deprived of this essential resource', and 'progressive higher rates for excessive consumption'. Word choice and collocation are generally accurate throughout. There are only occasional minor limitations, but overall the lexical resource is strong and allows the writer to convey precise meanings clearly. This places the response comfortably in the Band 7.5 to 8.0 range.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 7.5

The essay displays a wide range of complex grammatical structures used with a high degree of accuracy. The majority of sentences are error-free, and complex forms—such as conditional or concessive clauses ('If consumers pay nothing regardless of how much they use, some may have little incentive...')—are handled with strong control. Punctuation is accurate, and the flow of sentences is smooth. While there are a few minor slips or slightly conventional phrasings, they do not impede communication or detract from the overall high quality of grammatical control, satisfying the Band 8 criteria effectively.

See this exact question answered at other band scores. The same prompt compared across bands.

Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.